MAC or PC?

[woody]

Have fun with it

[SFL]

Went into the Apple store last night. Loaded up my Flickr feed on the 27" mac. I was blown away by how amazing my pics looked. Not blowing my own trumpet but I had never seen them looking that way. I wanted the 27" one because you can upgrade the RAM yourself. I came home and ordered it online. So I'm not the proud owner of a new shiny iMac. 

 

I've been needing something of late to re-ignite my photography. Editing has been a chore and I've heard great things about Aperture. My only gripe was that I didn't order the fusion Drive system. I have no idea why I thought the 27" came as standard with it. Never mind. 

 

Finally, you pulled the plug!.  A 27" with 16GB RAM, that was originally what I wanted but my budget didn't allow me to buy it, as I was migrating from PC I had to buy various programmes, etc.  I didn't know you could do the upgrade yourself until I read this topic.

 

Have a great time with the new machine!

[Paulstw]

Cheers  

 

I have toyed all day with calling up to change it to a Fusion Drive but PS takes 16 seconds to load on my Core i3 machine with 4GB of RAM in it, so anything faster will sort me out. I do plan to take out the 8GB of RAM and put in heatsinked 32Gb to max it out. 

Looking forward to having something totally different to work on. 

[Robert M Estall]

On the latest range of super thin-edged iMacs, you will be forced to buy your extra RAM when you order the 21 inch as there is no easy access. Also, check the speed specs of the built-in Hard Drive on the 21 inch

 

27 inches of screen sounds huge, but the novelty of all that space lasts about half an hour, after which it will seem a mystery how you ever managed without it. Just turn down the brightness a fair bit.

 

The new 27 inch does have a little access point behind the foot and you can slip in the extra RAM yourself easily. Whole lot cheaper from Crucial. The fusion drive seems a good solution for work speed and reasonable storage. Lack of CD/DVD access seems a pain but to be honest, I hardly ever use the DVD drive on my older 27 inch iMac.

 

With only a 6.5 mg ( as tested) broadband speed out here in the sticks, I wouldn't want to rely on downloading full fat applications. We used to think 6.5 was fast but things have fattened up to make us need better and faster. We are promised 20 mgs but When? It slowed to 1.1 mg for a couple of days this week and that seemed unbearable.

[Gervais Montacute]

The RAM from Crucial is not just about being less expensive than Apple RAM, although it obviously is. It's worth remembering it's also guaranteed for life. I sent some RAM back to Crucial about a year ago that had been in the MacPro for a few years and two sticks failed. They replaced them in an instant.

 

The thing about the 27 inch screen size is true. But in my case I am currently sitting in front of an Apple Cinema Display at 30 inches, so 27 inch will seem quite small in comparison. I will be selling the 30 inch in the future I expect.

 

The iMac thing is more about having it all in one now these things have become much more powerful. Incidentally, the new forthcoming MacPro, which is not very big at all looks crazy powerful but I can't afford one of those and would probably never use it anywhere near to it's full potential.

 

I have the iMac in its box in front of me and I guess I'm going to have to open and check right now in case there is another issue. 

[spacecadet]

I'm bemused at this discussion but then for 20 years I used a Hasselblad which was 15 years old when I bought it and I still miss using it. (Not that I sold it; I don't give kit away.) But then I'm still using a 10-year-old PC.

[Gervais Montacute]

That's fascinating Mark. But totally irrelevant to the original question. Unless you could persuade someone to go out and buy a 10 year old PC that would be capable of running today's software.

 

In my other "job" of writing stock music for a publishing company, a 10 year old PC would be classed as junk based on what we need to put inside a computer today that will actually work.

 

It's a sad fact of life that, while keeping all of ones old gear would great, because after all, it was probably great when originally bought, the software developers have us all by the goolies and they know it. Especially companies like Adobe.

[spacecadet]

I'm not sure it is irrelevant. I am still using LR2 and PS7 and a DSLR released in about 2008. What it needs by way of post-processing hasn't changed, and won't. It is possible to carry on using fairly old stuff, for imaging, anyway.

There's also the small, or not so small, matter of necessity. Sure, I'd like a faster PC on occasion, but the return doesn't justify the outlay.

What I thought I was reading was an equipment discussion rather divorced from image-making.

[Duncan_Andison]

 

The RAM from Crucial is not just about being less expensive than Apple RAM, although it obviously is. It's worth remembering it's also guaranteed for life. I sent some RAM back to Crucial about a year ago that had been in the MacPro for a few years and two sticks failed. They replaced them in an instant.

 

The thing about the 27 inch screen size is true. But in my case I am currently sitting in front of an Apple Cinema Display at 30 inches, so 27 inch will seem quite small in comparison. I will be selling the 30 inch in the future I expect.

 

The iMac thing is more about having it all in one now these things have become much more powerful. Incidentally, the new forthcoming MacPro, which is not very big at all looks crazy powerful but I can't afford one of those and would probably never use it anywhere near to it's full potential.

 

I have the iMac in its box in front of me and I guess I'm going to have to open and check right now in case there is another issue.   

 

Another 1+ for Crucial memory. I've upgraded all of my iMacs in the past with their memory and it has been top notch, both in terms of performance and their customer service. In fact, I now I could replace two 2mb blocks with 8's..... I may run their app on it to make sure..... could give it an extra boost!!

[Betty LaRue]

Another vote for Mac.  I used PCs until the previous computer before the present one.  Got tired of the crashes, and wanted to see for myself what all the raves about Macs for photography work were about.  I got an iMac, and used it 5 years, then drooled over the new ones last December, so bought a 27" one, upgraded HD, RAM.  And got a nice price from selling the old iMac, thank you very much.  It handles everything I want to throw at it without crashing.

 

I can't see myself ever going back to a PC.  My husband still uses a PC and regularly calls on me to figure out what has gone wrong with it.  But considering my brain kicked out all the Windows stuff after years of Mac use, I find it difficult now to get around in a PC.  I can, but have to think about it.   If I want something, and it costs more than something else I could settle for, I don't settle.  If it means I have to save a little longer to get what I really want, then that's what I do.  In the long run, for me, anyway, it is the smile on my face once I get the item I truly coveted over thinking I let $$ push me into 2nd best.

[Gervais Montacute]

I'm not sure it is irrelevant. I am still using LR2 and PS7 and a DSLR released in about 2008. What it needs by way of post-processing hasn't changed, and won't. It is possible to carry on using fairly old stuff, for imaging, anyway.

There's also the small, or not so small, matter of necessity. Sure, I'd like a faster PC on occasion, but the return doesn't justify the outlay.

What I thought I was reading was an equipment discussion rather divorced from image-making.

 

It's also possible that that there are actually people out there that want to carry on with old stuff. I understand totally the matter of necessity. But 'justifying the return' generally has no meaning to longterm Mac users in my experience. People generally, I reiterate, don't think about cost when then buy Macs. Or if they do, they generally think about the cost days later.

 

[Imagery by Charly]

I've always bought Kingston RAM for my PCs and iMac, never had any issues, whether bought from Kingston or another company. I went from 8GB to 12GB on the 27" iMac with DuoCore 3.3GHz CPU, 1TB HD/860GB free space and only crashed it once, well the kiddo did. I had been doing a lot of editing previously and she worked on a large Ai project file and when she went to save it, it crashed. After shut down/boot up it worked just fine. I often forget to reboot, as the iMac doesn't get bogged down, after days of being on and used hard, like the 8GB RAM 2.8GHz CPU PC did all the time on a regular basis.

 

+1 Betty LaRue, I too enjoy not having to mess with a Mac like I did for years on PCs.

 

Wow Paul, the new iMacs allow for 32GB of RAM? Personally don't think you'll ever need that much for photo editing, but it's personal choice or prolly good for gamers, which I'm not.

[Paulstw]

I've been playing the guitar for 20 years now, and the thought of actually recording some stuff appeals to me, now that I know how to hook it all up to the MAC. I have a lot of video editing to do for someone too. I used to be a gamer, sitting for 48 hours at the screen playing Lineage II but not anymore lol. 

 

You're only as fast as your slowest component, and the 7200rpm HDD is certainly going to be the Achilles heal for this mac. There is options later once the warranty runs out to tinker with it and add an SSD as the main drive, however, by that time they will be pennies  

[Gervais Montacute]

I wouldn't bother doing that Paul. The main drive on an iMac IMO is really just a place where I hold my programs. Lightroom etc.

 

For streaming and storage which is very cheap nowadays, we have Thunderbolt and USB 3 ports on the back. An SSD in an external enclosure with a TB connect would be a good option. I know this is a photographic forum, but you would be amazed at what the iMac can do with just normal 7200 rpm drives internally AND externally for streaming believe it not. If you knew what I have to stream into the iMac, although no chance to set it all up yet, it would make your eyes water.

[Paulstw]

So you're saying I can attach an SSD to a thunderbolt connector and run apps off it? Actually the speed of the mac is fine. I'll probably run with this set up for ages without complaint.  

[OneWay]

Wait until your internal HD starts shown signs of failing, then open up the iMac and replace the disk drive with an SSD. That will be in about five years or so… 

 

The replacement SSD has completely revived my 2006 vintage 20-inch iMac. I may never buy that coveted 27-inch…sigh...

 

Dave

[Gervais Montacute]

You could run a small country with your iMac and Thunderbolt enabled external HDs Paul!

 

Dave is right imo. The internal 7200 will be good to go for ages probably, unless it's faulty and it shouldn't be that. Can happen. But rare. I have 4 internal 7200 HDs in the MacPro. Think of it this way. The first HD (if you like) holds all the programs. The other 3 are used for storage and streaming. Since you are mainly

talking about images here, and programs such as LR5 etc. then think of it this way. Programs on the internal and storage on externals. But you would would probably want to utilise your TB connectors (or why bother to have them?) for that type of external HD. Why? Terrific speed compared to 7200 and say USB. No Firewire anymore

on the new iMacs (i'm beginning to sound like Jeff!)

 

When you mentioned music applications then with iMacs you would would simply need a midi interface, soundcard (eg Duet 2) etc and whatever you require should you want to get audio into say Garageband  or Logic Pro X.  Again, Logic on the main drive and Audio streaming from externals would be the way to go. You could do it all on the one drive but

if it gets to be a big audio/software instrument amount of tracks there may be bottlenecks and hence a lot of crackling noise. I will have to daisychain on my new iMac via TB connectors. What fun!

 

That aside, for photography only, programs inside and storage outside.

 

I have the new 27 inch 3.5 ghz turbo'd to 3.9 i7 just sitting on another desk at the moment and it's just sitting there like a black monolith. It'll take me an age to configure it for what I have to do and will probably have to get someone in to do most of it.

[Duncan_Andison]

Wait until your internal HD starts shown signs of failing, then open up the iMac and replace the disk drive with an SSD. That will be in about five years or so… 

 

The replacement SSD has completely revived my 2006 vintage 20-inch iMac. I may never buy that coveted 27-inch…sigh...

 

Dave

 

Spooky.... the hard drive of my 2007 imac gave up in 2012!! 

 

The SSD in the macbook air is really impressive so I would imagine the imac would be really responsive with one. They seem to be coming down in price a little more now..... by the time my Mid 2011 model needs a refresh they will probably be quite affordable!!!

[Ed Endicott]

I use a HP HPE-510t that I bought two years ago.  I'm using Windows 7 Professional-64 bit with 16gb RAM and 3.4 Ghz processor.  The reason I went with this system is because it was offered in a configuration that came with two hard drives and a RAID backup system (configured to mirror each other).  Over the past two years I've had multiple programs/processes running without a problem.  If I'm editing photos I generally have a TV running through the media center (on a second monitor) or I'm watching a streaming video via Amazon or listening to music via Pandora while running Lightroom, CS6, Mozilla Firefox, Yammer, and Microsoft Outlook as well as background processes including Norton Antivirus.  I also have a Drobo with two 2tb hard drives (configured to mirror each other) that I manage my Lightroom Library of photos and videos in.

 

Within the past month, after upgrading to Lightroom version 5.2 I noticed a performance issue with relation to using the brush.  I've updated the video card driver (Nvidia GeFroce GE 440) and haven't had an issue since.

 

I haven't owned a MAC in about 18 years and have no idea if it has the same capabilities but I'm very happy with what I have currently.  If I were to upgrade anything it would be adding two more drives to the Drobo (or upgrading the Drobo altogether).

[Julie Edwards]

the OS is just a facilitator.

 

Maybe and yes an Mac is just a well built Intel box but my Mac Book Pro dual boots Win7 64 Bit and OSX.. Any guesses which OS is faster and lasts longer on batteries?

[Paulstw]

As an IT admin I sit at a Windows 7 computer with two 24" LED monitors for the best part of 40 hours a week. I need to use Micro$oft tech all day, and stare a variations of Server OS'. The latest being Server 2010 with it's tiled displays. Really? on a server? 

 

Anyway, my point is, I go home, and I turn on my Windows 7 laptop. It feels like I never left work. I needed a change fast and after the few days I've had it, I will never buy another windows based PC for personal use again. It's a breath of fresh air for me personally and a welcomed change to Windows  

[Gervais Montacute]

Most of the guys I know who do stock tv and film music use either PCs or Macs or both. Yes both. Why?  Because an ethernet cable can be used to tie them both in with clever software that allows ram and cpu power to be spread etc etc. Some use several PCs, some several Macs and as I said a mixture.

 

The only reason they use a PC(s) as an addendum to the Mac is cost. PCs are always cost based in this instance. Nothing wrong with them. It's like anything. If they work then great.

 

With images there's really no need for any of that (unless you're into animation and then that's what the new MacPro will be for tied to other MacPros via Thunderbolt). With images it just boils down to personal choice and it's all good.

[Pearl]

I switched from PC to Mac in 2008 and would not think of going back.  Started with a Macbook and external monitor in case I didn't like it but upgraded to a Mac Mini about a year ago.  Had been looking at a Macbook Pro or iMac but decided on the Mac Mini because I think it has bags of features for the price.  I have the 1TB fusion drive and upgraded the RAM to 16GB from Crucial which was dead easy. I use the same monitor as before with one small monitor for emails etc.  Most of my photos are stored on a Drobo and a few small external hard drives.

It's a brilliant setup IMO and so much better value than the other Macs.

 

Pearl

[Ed Rooney]

I owned two Mac Minis, one after the other, before I got my iMac, Pearl. They were great.  And what a bargain for a Mac product. I can't really remember why I switched. The iMac does have a smaller footprint, since everything is in the screen housing. 

[woody]

 

the OS is just a facilitator.

 

Maybe and yes an Mac is just a well built Intel box but my Mac Book Pro dual boots Win7 64 Bit and OSX.. Any guesses which OS is faster and lasts longer on batteries?

The meaningful test is to compare your MAC against a PC configuration that cost the same amount of money.